It is hard to say at this point what exactly I expect my career to look like. For the first time ever I have not constructed a plan for my immediate future. I wanted to be mentally open to seize a variety of opportunities within this broad and expansive field of Communications. With that being said, I am on the Journalism Innovations track so that gives some degree of direction as to what I’d like to do with my new knowledge and skill set.
This week in class we covered some technologies that I had never heard of and a few that I had. As we were introduced to these innovations we were asked to consider what aspects came true, what became out-dated, or what missed the mark.
Some were innovations that I missed from the past such as the 1983 VideoTex; the Viewtron System and Scepter Videotex Terminal from AT&T. This allowed customers to do a variety of tasks such as banking, games and checking the weather from their televisions using a keypad.
Another example was the SixthSense technology developed by Pranav Mistry in the years leading up to 2009. With his wearable gear you could take pictures without a camera, annotate objects, and bring the digital to “life” and bring life to digital.
In a TED Talk we watched George Bloom describe his Meta-verse of virtual reality. He discussed the potential for a smaller carbon foot print if film-makers were able to use virtual sets for their movies instead of finding actual locations.
If you are listening to developers today you hear about the use of AR and VR (Augmented reality and Virtual reality). There were recently a few articles surrounding Elon Musk’s comments surround AR/VR, warning about the potential dangers of these technologies as well as a video created of “Barack Obama” made by an arsenal of audio and video files stitched together to make a new video– something never wholely spoken by former President Obama. In a day and age where we are already facing severe problems with news sources, fake videos could only make matters worse.
I see people on Facebook still sharing articles from The Onion not realizing it is satire. I think one of the things to come in conjunction with technological innovations are labels. Perhaps not in their original settings, but once they appear on social media they will have some indication. Just like with nutrition, people will have to label their content. If it is satire, they will need to label it as such. If it is a blog, it will need to be clearly labeled. People will need to know an articles’ ingredients and if none are present it is a certainly a good way to rule it out as a reliable source. As new teams come into play within different social groups, like those just beginning their partnership in journalism for Facebook, there will be more regulations on social networks towards news articles.
People will begin to walk the fine line between virtual reality news stories and augmented reality news stories and given their realistic components it may be even harder to differentiate real from fiction. 360 degree images and Virtual Reality video could lend incredible authenticity and immersion to news-readers but due to that real-factor it could also lead to a larger margin for misleading your audience and a larger margin for affecting your audience. Studies have shown that Virtual Reality media tends to be a bit more impacting, which means that in the hands of someone with a specific mission, they could more easily achieve their goal of persuasion.
This is off the mark with journalism though. Maybe there is some small point that a journalist is trying to get across but ultimately the goal is to inform. People can make their own decisions after reading or watching a journalist’s piece but straight persuasion is too close to propaganda for our Democratic Republic.
The equipment necessary for VR or AR right now is too directive for journalism at this point. The subjects are too aware of the people present. The gear is not easy to ignore. People behave differently when they know they are being watched. Until less bulky or more integrative equipment can be used it is problematic for journalistic story-telling.
So as people have an easier time creating alternate realties whether it is VR or AR, or through technologies like the meta-verse I think news-consumers will have a harder time assessing the truth from fake news by themselves. There is a potential for an incredible up-hill battle for journalists and story tellers. I see the divide between believers and skeptics getting bigger. If the internet continues down this path of complete disillusion and unsystematic news-telling then there will continue to be a serious “fake news” problem for countries. The “sources” people could include might be harder to discredit upon initial viewing, especially with the AR/VR capabilities.
As a potential content creator or manager the technology excites me. You can tell immersive and engaging stories like never before. However this means that if the technology was being used by people with specific motives they could be very successful in deceiving their audience as well.
I think if our media companies and government were cognizant of the potential for damage, they would be creating some guidelines or laws for publishers and writers, both the large and small players, along with establishing clear and easy ways for people to perform online “citizen’s arrests” against people they find in violation of the law. There is just too much to cover online and people need to be better equipped against what they might find online.










